State v. Fowler, 2014 Ohio 5687

David Fowler pled no contest to four counts of importuning (R.C. 2907.07(D)(2)) based on online contacts with an undercover officer he believed to be 13–15 years old. Each count corresponded to contacts on different dates (Sept. 10, Sept. 11, Sept. 17, Oct. 1, 2013).
Each count included a furthermore clause alleging a prior sexually-oriented conviction; Fowler was notified he would be a Tier III sex offender with five years postrelease control.
At sentencing the trial court imposed one-year prison terms on each count and ordered them to be served consecutively (total four years). The court also included court costs in the journal entry and credited Fowler with 125 days of jail-time credit.
Fowler appealed, raising four assignments of error: (1) trial court failed to merge allied offenses; (2) consecutive sentences contrary to law; (3) imposition of costs without pronouncement at hearing; (4) failure to calculate jail-time credit.
The appellate court (Eighth Dist.) overruled merger and jail-time-credit claims, but found reversible error on consecutive-sentence findings (trial court failed to state that consecutive sentences were not disproportionate) and on imposition of costs (costs were not pronounced at the sentencing hearing).
Remedy: judgment reversed, sentence vacated, remanded for resentencing with required R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) findings placed on the record and in the journal entry; limited remand to allow Fowler to seek waiver of court costs.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the four importuning convictions are allied offenses that must merge	State: each count charged separate acts on separate dates; can be sentenced separately	Fowler: offenses arose from same victim with same animus so should merge	Not merged; convictions may be separately sentenced (separate dates/animus)
Whether consecutive sentences were lawful	State: consecutive terms justified by recent release, prior similar conduct, and danger to public	Fowler: consecutive sentences improper because statutory findings were not made/record incomplete	Vacated; trial court failed to find that consecutive terms are not disproportionate; remand for resentencing with full R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) findings
Whether court costs can be imposed in the journal entry without being pronounced at hearing	State: court costs may be imposed against convicted defendants (acknowledged procedural error here)	Fowler: costs improper because not imposed in open court, deprives opportunity to claim indigency	Sustained; limited remand to allow Fowler to seek cost waiver before resentencing
Whether jail-time credit was miscalculated or omitted	State: sentencing entry credited 125 days; no error asserted	Fowler: trial court failed to provide four months credit	Overruled; entry shows 125 days credit, claim denied

State v. Johnson, 128 Ohio St.3d 153 (clarifies allied-offenses analysis focusing on conduct and separate animus)
State v. Brown, 119 Ohio St.3d 447 (discusses single-act/single-state-of-mind test referenced in allied-offenses analysis)
State v. Williams, 134 Ohio St.3d 482 (appellate review of allied-offenses determinations is de novo)
State v. Bonnell, 140 Ohio St.3d 209 (requires statutory findings for consecutive sentences to be on the record and supports meaningful review)
State v. White, 103 Ohio St.3d 580 (R.C. 2947.23 requires assessment of prosecution costs; procedural protections for indigent defendants)
State v. Joseph, 125 Ohio St.3d 76 (trial court must pronounce costs in open court; failure triggers limited remand to consider waiver)